As a lover of cricket and rugby union, I often like to compare what the sporting codes can learn from each other.
Whilst there is an array of different fields in which both sports can replicate certain models such as commercial, sport science and data fields, the average fan just wants to see more rugby or cricket. Specifically more high-quality rugby or cricket.
This is why, rugby, although facing some cultural and commercial differences to cricket, can fulfil both Sir Bill Beaumont’s plans of a globalised rugby tournament and potentially feed fans with more marquee match-ups to replace either the autumn or summer internationals that add a degree of competition and breed high-quality rugby. This is not to say I would like to completely end autumn and summer international tours, but the idea of a Champions Trophy rugby tournament is something that could really benefit the elite rugby circle.
Firstly, the ICC Champions Trophy was inaugurated in 1998 (surprisingly a cricket tournament was won by South Africa) as a trophy second in significance to the World Cup. Football has the Euros and Americas Cup as examples of prestigious secondary trophies available in line to the World Cup. Cricket has the World Cup, followed by the T20 World Cup, the current Test Championship and the disbanded Champions Trophy.
Whilst it is hard to compare rugby to Football and Cricket with regards to different tournaments (different cricket formats and wider audience scale in football make these different tournaments inevitable), rugby union, at least, cannot survive with just the Webb Ellis Cup every four years. A Champions Trophy with the top-ranked eight to 12 teams is needed in order to increase viewership and competitive interest in the game.
With the impact of COVID on rugby finances, the home nations boards of the RFU, WRFU and Scottish Rugby have all announced significant austerity in their funding of rugby sevens. Rugby sevens is not rugby’s T20 cricket – it is not marketable enough nor would it draw more interest than a Champions Trophy staged for four weeks in which the best of the best battle it out.
(Photo by Anthony Au-Yeung/Getty Images)
Whilst summer tours are enthralling to see the likes of historic rivalries such as England versus everyone and seeing other home nations fare down South, there needs to be a strong sense of regular knock-out rugby being played in between World Cup Cycles – the Autumn Nations Cup, while showing some unappealing games, unarguably benefitted teams in how to adapt to high-pressure consecutive weeks in which every game is a must-win.
Compared to the World Cup, you know South Africa will play their B team against Namibia or Tonga and still win by 70 points. You know the All Blacks will play their C team against *insert struggling Tier 2 nation here* and still put on 11 tries.
Whilst it is a spectacle to see how smaller, growing rugby nations play the more established teams, there is a stage where you ask, “what’s the point in watching such a predictable game?” The Champions Trophy eliminates this and creates the high-pressure environments of which every game is a must-win.
The same can be said for cricket in its Champions Trophy tournaments; the eventual champions can only afford at maximum one or two losses, making it more open for underdogs to qualify for the quarter or semi-finals. Bangladesh, for example, qualified for the last four out of a group containing England, Australia and New Zealand, although weather did play a part.
Logistically, rugby can feasibly run a tournament like a Champions Trophy with the top-ranked nations. Given that 20 compete in the World Cup, no more than 12 teams should be competing. The number is freely up for debate, but this is perhaps where the biggest issue arises. Having the top eight currently would mean Wales, Japan and Fiji would miss out on the tournament.
(Photo by Stu Forster/Getty Images)
The 2017 ICC Champions Trophy saw the West Indies miss out – having fewer teams can make every Test match more important for qualification, but fans must evaluate the risk of seeing a big name miss out at each separate competition.
Secondly, the biggest concern with this is the disparity between Tier 1 and Tier 2 nations. Watching Oceans Apart makes me realise that rugby’s Champions Trophy should only be discussed on fan forums, due to the neglect of the Pacific Island nations and potential growing rugby markets. This is what rugby cannot learn from cricket: rugby wishes to and to an extent is growing in the Americas, Eastern Europe and East Asia, whereas cricket is mainly home to England and former British colonies.
A competition of rugby’s richest and best teams may be one the board members of investment groups and fans would love to see, but it would be one in which the growing and near unsolvable problems of the Tier 2 world will only be increasingly ignored. World rugby cannot afford the Pacific Islands to increasingly become rugby’s West Indian, Zimbabwe and potentially soon to become South African cricket teams in which political and economic divide and inequality kill the sport in these traditional countries.
Overall, it is up for you to decide whether you would like to see a tournament as such. Here’s to 2021.
Take the Points
Roar Rookie
Couldn't agree more. The sooner this happens the sooner we see these teams become more competitive and as a result more entertaining games. Piutau, Fekitoa and George Moala playing for Tonga and players like Nonu, Lautua, Victor Vito, Sopoaga and Julian Savea playing for Samoa. These would now become truly competitive teams on the world stage
LVK
Guest
What Samoa, Tonga and Fiji need is for players of origin to be eligible to play for their home country despite having played for AUS, NZ etc. That is, a player of tongan origin should be allowed to play for Tonga at any time despite having played for NZ already, for example.
Micko
Roar Rookie
No idea. I think in the Hockey it's just the top spots in the rankings qualify for the tournament, so you rarely got exactly the same nations qualify for each tournament. I don't know how the Cricket version worked (and neither did most people I think) it was obviously just a cash grab. There already was the World Cup, so anyone remotely interested in the sport was already invested in that.
soapit
Roar Guru
part of the problem with the champions trophy is it makes no sense. what are they champions of?
Clinton Drake
Roar Rookie
"and potentially soon to become South African cricket teams in which political and economic divide and inequality kill the sport in these traditional countries" Well to read that as a South African hurts immensely, and yet somehow rings true.
Sluggy
Roar Guru
All the same, money is still going to be the problem. Just say there are 4 pools, with 'tiered ' (by groups of 4) opponents, and somehow the random draw produces a pool with* the ABs (tier one) , the Wobblies (tier two), Georgia (tier three) and USA (tier four). That gives two home tests each in NZ/Oz against lower tier opponents, and a fight over where "Bledisloe game one" gets played that year. A fight, basically, over money. Meanwhile, you could equally have a group drawn from the tiers with England, Ireland, Wales and Italy in it. (2, 5, 9 & 14.) Where are they going to play that in July? Or, do you put the whole thing in one country and move the windows - in which case the greedy French and English clubs will probably start court proceedings, again. [* current rankings on the WR site are ABs 3, Wobs 6, Georgia 12, USA 16]
Rob9
Roar Guru
Did you not click the link Jacko? I'm not making this stuff up.... it's a World Rugby clip and when discussing the structure they refer to conferences (which you've disputed that the original concept didn't have.... yet here's the first official release on a Nations Championship concept from WR). It's not even NH/SH. It's Europe and 'Rest of the World'. Just click the link... I'm not sure what you could possibly be arguing over. But it is you so...
So the RC is a comp with a pools then? All the SH sides are in one pool and they all play each other twice? Its not pools Rob its NH and SH.....6 from each and they play every team once.....
JD Kiwi
Roar Rookie
Sluggy, the plan is to have pools then knockout I think, ideally by combining the July and November windows into one.
Rob9
Roar Guru
It always has been conferences Jacko. Clear as day. The conferences (or geography) don’t determine the matches each team plays. What they do is ensure that there’s always 6 Euro and 6 non-Euro teams in the 1st division 2 Euro and 2 non-Euro teams in the finals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoH3xDV8LD4 Regardless, it’s all over now. Rightfully so. Back to the drawing board for WR to come up with something better that appeases all stakeholders.
Of course neutral....They couldnt all be still playing in a current SR side as where would the NZ players be playing? There is only 180 SR players at any 1 time... Where were they born? Just google it...Its simple
Covid enforced anomaly? Just ask Argentina about that! Covid-used-as-an-excuse anomaly...Yep Its not a conference......Its geography!!!!!
The Late News
Roar Rookie
nah...you are missing the gig that the second tier nations cant hold their own players at home. The Euro/quid/yen wins...
The Neutral View From Sweden
Roar Guru
NZR allows three non-AB eligible PI players in their Super Rugby squads. No NZ team uses all three spots. For the upcoming season it looks like this: Blues have two Samoan Test players. Chiefs have zero PI Test players. Crusaders have one Samoan Test player. Highlanders have one Tongan Test player. Hurricanes have one Samoan Test player.
The Neutral View From Sweden
Roar Guru
Just use Google…Its simple Three players from the Samoan WC squad 2019 played for a NZ SR team. One player from the Tongan WC squad 2019 played for a NZ SR team. Zero players from the Fijian WC squad 2019 played for a NZ SR team. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Rugby_World_Cup_squads
Rob9
Roar Guru
Move on from inventing issues re; rankings. The closest thing you’ve got to a valid point is a covid-enforced anomaly. The ‘conferences’ still involve playing all other teams from the opposing conference for a total of 11 games. The conference model with crossover semi finals was present in the original release from World Rugby back in early 2019. Proposed amendments have focused on the promotion/relegation aspect of the concept.
firstly move on from the rankings…A better rankings system is just a by product of the top 12 teams playing each other every year……i dont care about ranking and no they currently arnt a fairly accurate way of showing anything when its rated a lot higher for thw WC than it is for any other test…..And pretty stupid when you refuse to play and yet retain your no 1 ranking…..Different if you couldnt play but refusing to aint good… Original comp did not have pools…..That was something which the NH teams did not like as the3 teams would have had to travel between Aus, NZ and SA etc each week for tests unlike their current tours where they are based in one country….. 6N had 5 tests each team and RC had 3 tests per team plus Japan and Fiji then the crossovers…so 11 tests per year towards the comp…
Rob9
Roar Guru
Wrong. Under the World Rugby proposal released in 2019, the top 2 from each conference progresses to a semi final. Just 1 less knock out round than the RWC. Rankings are fine and a fairly accurate reflection of rugby’s world order (at least in the top 10 where it counts). Any discrepancies that emerge are usually ironed out after a few weeks of test rugby (in non covid times).
Rob Im not advocating something we already have...Im saying that a championship whould make ratings a lot easier to work....and a lot more accurate, but throw rankings away...who cares...The equality of the comps returns is what I am advocating for.....The only knockout part of the championship comes in the finals....1 v 2...3 v 4 etc to decide final finishing positions...Every other part is about all 11 matches before that point.....So worst the top finishing side could finish is 2nd.....
That should be the plan altho Im not sure about the tickets.......But is it fair that NZ gets their expenses paid in that same match where as England get all the money from the tickets?.....Equality was in the original format first presented and voted down by Scotland and italy....Basically the Unions get an amout per match from the Backers and the backers get the extra revenue if their is any......Its the only way to get Fiji an equal share but not Georgia as they would start in tier 2 not tier 1 so the amount they get would be based on the tier 2 comp value and that may include teams like Samoa and Tonga as well. The original concept was very good and very fair to all...........